click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130324
20130324
STATION
KNTV (NBC) 3
KQED (PBS) 2
MSNBCW 2
CSPAN 1
FBC 1
KGO (ABC) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
LANGUAGE
English 17
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
that you can be certain of, as obama looks at syria and iran, he wants to avoid any kind of entangling war, long expedition nature war like america has fought over the last 10 years. chris: these wars, if we go into iran, does anyone think it's a quick war, in and out, without historic repercussions on the other side? >> absolutely not, which is part of the reason why nobody within the -- there are very few people in the administration that have any sort of appetite for a war in iran. the same goes with syria. we saw with the libya entanglement, we saw sort of barack obama's doctrine. he is going to be looking for very much multinational-type force. he is going to the u.n. he is looking for the french to take a lot of the lead. he is going to be -- but nobody, even with both syria and with iran, there is no nobody particularly at the pentagon who is really wanting to do this right now. and barack obama least of all. chris: michael. >> chris, this poses problems, the perception which i think is accurate of our wearyness causes problems particularly in iran. people don't believe that this pr
. they are in a difficult neighborhood. the israelis, two years ago obama called for it. it's going to be dicey. iran is still the world's leading sponsor of terrorism,. lou: the president use the expression game changer if it were to occur. was his visit to israel a game changer? >> i think it is a little too early to tell. what we don't know is what those two men said behind closed doors. we should have no illusions here. however warm and cozy it can be. lou: however cozy the relationship. however warm the reception. these gentlemen have istinctly different things when it comes around. >> i almost agree. notentirely. i don't think thee have different agendas. i think that everything that was said, what you heard is that obama and benjamin netanyahu were much closer together are not. what obama said, he said we are not going to allow iran to have nuclear weapons. he said we are notoing to allow them to have weapons in an attempt to contain them. they were much closer thanhey have been. a very key subject. a. lou: let's turn to something that i did not want to hear. that was america and president oba
, the israelis have given obama a medal. they appear to be on the same page on iran. >> diplomacy and sanctions have not stopped iran's nuclear programs. diplomacy and sanctions must be augmented by a clear and credible threat of military action. >> we will do what is necessary to prevent iran from getting the world's worst weapons. >> will this story have a happy ending? >> this story will not have a happy ending. what we saw this week was barack obama at his best, connecting with an audience, and he made a compelling case for the need for a two-state solution, the security of israel and the well- being of the region. >> charles? >> the emphasis has been on personality. what happened is obama changed his positions on the settlement and the peace process. he realized he made a terrible mistake in the first term. he insisted on a settlement freeze as a preconditio. it wrecked peace negotiations and stopped everything. he changed, went back and said in a startling statement that if you get a peace agreement, the sttlement will be resolved-- talled automatically. so, they are not the central issue
and for that reason i think that despite the optics of a happy visit, the differences between israel and the obama administration remains. >> prime minister netanyahu thinks that iran could get it done by this summer. president says one year from now. when they are together does that now say look they are going to get a bomb and we are going to launch an attack whether you like it or not and what does the president say and -- what do you think will happen? >> well, i think they exchange intelligence and i do think that despite the -- difficulties of the personal relationship between obama and netanyahu, i'm sure these discussions are conduct order a very prank and professional basis but countries, vital nation security interests are involved. i think both men recognize the personal can't get in the way of that. i don't think that there is any doubt that israel sees a much shorter time frame, especially given its own who are limited military capabilities. whoever is right on the intelligence and must be clear we don't have perfect intelligence. iran could be a lot closer than anybody. we have great
and jordan while a reinvigorated peace process is one goal, more pressing concerns for the obama white house, the threats from iran and the effect of the relentless bloodshed in syria. we want to begin with some analysis about the president's trip this morning with our chief foreign correspondent richard engel back from the region. he is in new york this morning. i have david brooks of "the new york times" and e.j. dionne with the "washington post" here with me in washington. richard, let me start with you. the president called on israel to renew efforts to the creation of a palestinian state. he helped restore the israeli/turkish relationship. so what else do you think he can return with that he can actually build upon? >> well, i think the reconciliation between turkey and israel is something that's very important, because i wouldn't see the chances right now of an israeli/palestinian reconciliation, but i do think the middle east recognizes that there are urgent regional matters as syria implodes that the region needs to have some sort of summit and turkey is going to play a big part of t
a little bit. dan, is that because he believes that barack obama in the end will be willing to strike? >> the last spring, at the policy conference, his policy prevention, prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon, not containment. we'll do everything we need to do and containment won't work. in an essence, president was taking his own at home, containing an iran nuclear program is unworkable. for him to say that in israel on the grounds, was a powerful statement. i think, it had the effect of reassuring the prime minister and the president seems to have discarded, or at least seriously subordinated the policy, so, he's telling israel we're not going to pressure you on the palestinian track. they're calling them nonconstructive. we're actually going to sound tougher on iran. >> does that tough talk mean that some kind of military action is inevitable in this second term for president obama? >> i don't think so. i think a lot of people will say privately a military intervention in iran would be catastrophic. signs for a better diplomacy. last week was iranian new year, for the first t
" david ignatius and kathleen parker. helene cooper and michael crowley. first up, what does barack obama know what we don't know pledging to use american power against iran and getting more deeply involved in syria? the american mood when it comes to using force feels like 1915, the end of vietnam. after that war, reluctance to commit power abroad was called vietnam syndrome. then came desert storm in 1991 and the first george bush told us that the lightning victory there had banished vietnam wearyness. >> it's a proud day for america and by god, we have kicked the vietnam syndrome once and for all. chris: after the second george bush launched two long wars, many feel war wearyness like against vietnam. against the wearyness, how should we take this week's statements from this president on veryia and iran? >> we are clear that the use of chemical weapons against the syrian people would be a serious and tragic mistake and i will repeat, all options are on the table. we will do what is necessary to prevent iran from getting
of iran and syria. no doubt, the obama white house will have to be dealing with. >> he is back wanting to deal with domestic issues including gun control. after sandy hook we all understood there was a narrow window to get change, meaningful change in terms of gun laws. what has happened now in terms of the assault weapons ban, and where all this goes? >> well, the question is whether the moment is effectively lost. i think that's a real question inside the white house among democrats and gun control supporters. the assault weapons ban will get a vote, but it's not going to pass. the big focus is on background checks, and the big political focus is not going away. i sat down with new york city mayor michael bloomberg who talked about his own big push to spend money to target lawmakers. he has taken names based on how they vote on the assault weapons ban. >> i think i have a responsibility, and i think you and all of your viewers have responsibilities to try to make this country safer for our families and for each other. we've spent $12 million on running ads in ten states around the co
. i think that's really important because as things stand now the, if barack obama doesn't want to be the guy on whose watch iran gets the nuclear weapon or the two-state solution expire, he is going to have to find a way to deal effectively and work cooperatively with the new government and with the prime minister. >> jamie: what about the secretary of state? >> you know, it's been my view from the very beginning that barack obama's the most controlling foreign policy president since richard nixon. hillary clinton was given very true truly cons quential issues to manage. kerry may be in a better situation because it's legacy time and obama is trying to figure out what do todo on the domestic side. he might turn john kerry, who is quite capable, into a manager in chief on the israeli/palestinian issue. >> jamie: let me focus on that. what is realistic, aaron? the palestinians want settlement building to stop. benjamin netanyahu says no. can we ever get them to the table with preconditions? >> no, not with preconditions. i think the president really dodged the one headache he cre
on the hook if iran doesn't react d diplomaticall diplomatically. >> it seems to raise a question of the president's credibility. u.s. standing probably has risen under president obama, but clout has fallen for the reasons i stated earlier, because of his reluctance to get involved over there. if you're the iranians and he says something like this, do you really take it it seriously at this point or is it simply barack obama saying things because he believes them himself? >> i would bet bret takes issue with the point about the standing question of the-- >> we're less popular in the arab world than we were, in much of the arab world than we were in the last year of george w. bush's presidency. >> paul: george, you mentioned jordan. is king abdullah, be the next arab ruler to fall in that region? and what would be the consequences, not just for israel, but for our own interests? >> it would be a disaster, we'd lose one of the last few moderates in the arab world and israel would lose along its longest border and-- >> how much trouble is the king in? i know there have beenprotests,
mean? psychology plays a big role in this. >> the question is, is obama going to be persuaded to go into syria, and can netanyahu convince him to move militarily against iran. that's the big stuff. the bon ame -- >> if they get the wrong drift in the level. >> the bon ame is to get to the big stuff. >> i think that pat is exactly right, how far obama is willing to go to put his money where his mouth is on helping israel. at this point that all looked well and good but i don't see him going far enough. >> eleanor, quickly. >> this is a gap between them on syria. i think netanyahu is just as wary of entering syria, but it did not prevent the president from going over netanyahu's head and talking to the israeli public, and there is a gap between what the people want and what the leaders want. >> here's what i want to know about syria, is do they have chemical weapons. >> they've got 'em. >> did you see that intriguing report, for a reporter who has been over there for years, reported on this for the independent, which i believe is an english newspaper, now available on your computer, w
to solicit an apology. did israel get something in return? i hope so, otherwise it makes it like obama is leaning on the israelis. >> chris: juan, i'll switch subjects on you. with the focus on syria and the focus on iran there was relatively little talk about the prospects for a peace deal between the israelis and the palestinians. but the president did address it in the speech, in jerusalem. >> president barack obama: peace is possible. it is possible. [applause]. >> president barack obama: i'm not saying it is guaranteed. i can't even say that it is more le likely than not but it is possible. >> chris: the big news here, the president seemed to be dropping his insistence that israel had to stop the settlement construction first before there were direct talks and faleaned the palestinians and said, look, if you make a final deal the settlements will take care of themselves. how big a movement is that? >> a big movement in terms of reframing the discussion because at the moment everybody is frozen, stalled. they can't come to a decision about the settlements because you know, obviousl
to issue some type of apology. did they get something in return? i hope so. otherwise it looks like obama is leaning on the israelis. bad signal to the rest of the region. >> chris: with all of the focus on syria and iran there was relatively little talk about the prospects for a peace deal between the israelis and palestinians but the president did address it in this speech in jerusalem. >> iit is possible. it is possible. i'm not saying it is guaranteed. i can't even say that it is more likely than not but it is possible. >> chris: juan, the big news here is that the president seemed to be dropping his in is siftence that israel had to stop its settlement construction first before there were direct talks. in fact he kind of leaned on the palestinians and said look if you make a final deal the settlements will take care of themselves. how big a movement is that? >> a big movement in terms of reframing the discussion because at the moment everybody is frozen, saled. they can't come to a decision about the settlements because obviously the palestinians view it as occupied territories. the
to baghdad to talk about weapons that iran is sending to syria by flying over iraqi air space. meanwhile, back home, president obama has returned from his four-day trip to the middle east. the president received praise from mitt romney's former chief foreign policy adviser on his commitment to containing the iranian nuclear program. take a listen. >> what he said in israel is, we will do everything we need to do and containment won't work. it's not a policy preference, it will not work. in a sense the president was taking on his own at home, saying containing an iran nuclear program is unworkable. and for him to say that in israel, on the ground, standing with the israeli prime minister was a powerful statement. so i think it had the effect of reassuring the prime minister. >>> and with the defense of marriage act and proposition 8 both going before the supreme court this week, it was a hot topic on many of the sunday morning shows. former adviser to president george w. bush, karl rove, was asked about gay rights and the future of the republican party on abc this morning. take a listen t
. host: did netanyahu we see if his strike authorization while giving president obama and his legacy? we have a window of opportunity for the fomc to work. opportunitydent -- for diplomacy to work. if israel goes into war against iran, you can bet that the united states will not sit idly by. it will be involved. the united states is not interested in the world is not interested. the last thing we need is another war in the middle east. an israeli strike will drive the united states into a war that no one can determine the future of. two monthse month or or years to come. suppose you want to go after the nuclear program and the facilities in iran. these are spread over a huge area. size ofthree times the iraq. it is not just one area like in the 1980's. that will take a huge effort to destroy it. i believe the united states was able to convince the israeli prime minister and the israeli government and even the hawks that perhaps we should hold back and allow the sanctions to work. they are working. there are all kinds of indications that iraq -- iran is getting the message. host: frank is
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)